Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

I know there is no "if" when discussing history. But let suppose that clown Wilson didn't get us into WWI, Germany & co would've won => the Czar would've been able to suppress Lenin, and there would've been no Hitler => no WWII.

And I bet you don't even know what is the difference b/w isolationism and non -interventionism.

Germany still would have lost. The war wasn't decided on the battlefield, it was decided when the Kaiser was overthrown. German reinforcements from the eastern front pushing back the western allies would not have changed this. If anything, the longer logistics trail needed to supply German troops after a successful offensive would only hasten the revolt due to stripping more resources from the population. Even if by some miracle Germany manages to win, the rest of your chain makes no sense at all. We still get the Weimar Republic, we still get Nazis, we still get Hitler, we still get Lenin, we still get Stalin, and on top of it, we might get a fascist France.

Even if we again don't get that by some miracle, Britain is facing a situation they have been trying to avoid for centuries, a single dominant continental power in Europe. This means They're going to be looking for a far closer alliance with the US than historically, and will be applying economic pressure on the Germans. In essence an early 20th century cold war, without nukes to make both sides go "oh shit" at the thought of it turning hot. We might end up getting a different WWII, but we're still getting one.

Germany still would have lost. The war wasn't decided on the battlefield, it was decided when the Kaiser was overthrown. German reinforcements from the eastern front pushing back the western allies would not have changed this. If anything, the longer logistics trail needed to supply German troops after a successful offensive would only hasten the revolt due to stripping more resources from the population. Even if by some miracle Germany manages to win, the rest of your chain makes no sense at all. We still get the Weimar Republic, we still get Nazis, we still get Hitler, we still get Lenin, we still get Stalin, and on top of it, we might get a fascist France.

Even if we again don't get that by some miracle, Britain is facing a situation they have been trying to avoid for centuries, a single dominant continental power in Europe. This means They're going to be looking for a far closer alliance with the US than historically, and will be applying economic pressure on the Germans. In essence an early 20th century cold war, without nukes to make both sides go "oh shit" at the thought of it turning hot. We might end up getting a different WWII, but we're still getting one.

Probably not Nazis. Hitler would be a threat to the Kaiser and be imprisoned for life.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Germany still would have lost. The war wasn't decided on the battlefield, it was decided when the Kaiser was overthrown. German reinforcements from the eastern front pushing back the western allies would not have changed this. If anything, the longer logistics trail needed to supply German troops after a successful offensive would only hasten the revolt due to stripping more resources from the population. Even if by some miracle Germany manages to win, the rest of your chain makes no sense at all. We still get the Weimar Republic, we still get Nazis, we still get Hitler, we still get Lenin, we still get Stalin, and on top of it, we might get a fascist France.

Even if we again don't get that by some miracle, Britain is facing a situation they have been trying to avoid for centuries, a single dominant continental power in Europe. This means They're going to be looking for a far closer alliance with the US than historically, and will be applying economic pressure on the Germans. In essence an early 20th century cold war, without nukes to make both sides go "oh shit" at the thought of it turning hot. We might end up getting a different WWII, but we're still getting one.

Lenin was exported by Wilhelm. And I wouldn't put too money on the British if Germany was able to freely conduct its naval warfare. And there would be a lot of uncertainty if we didn't send supply to Britain, and our merchants were able to trade with Germany.

So many "if".... But the biggest if is that even if Britain won, the treaty would've not been drafted in a way that it guaranteed WWII and the rise of Hitler.

Sure. This attitude definitely helped us during the Cold War and World War II.

Lets ignore the rest of the world. Lets just focus on ourselves, and be isolationists. I'm sure we'll be ok (sarcasm).

Care to define to me my 'attitude,' as you see it? Because the responses you make to my posts seem more or less unrelated. My original point was that the land that currently makes up the country known as the USA was probably better off under the original inhabitants, the Native American tribes, who had a much more sustainable economic model than modern western civilization. SaintlessHeart had mentioned something regarding his native country being better since it became globalized and modernized and I responded with my bit just to question whether modernization (and the related globalized world a country enters when they modernize) is objectively better than living in a more 'primitive' society.

But since you bring isolationism up, yeah it can be done, quite well in fact. There are people living in isolation in Brazil, and the Sentinelese of the Andaman Islands have been living on the same small island without depleting their resources for 60,000 years.

Projects being ramped up to tap huge undersea fields off the country's northwest could quadruple Australia's exports of liquefied natural gas in the next few years and turn it into what the country's resources minister has called an "energy superpower."

I don't think that I see (1) how much it costs to get the natural gas out from the ocean, (2) how risky it is for the workers, or (3) how much potential damage the drilling will do to the environment? The 2nd and 3rd should be controllable; unless we are talking extreme depths, neither should not be a problem.

The 1st may still be. The oil sands of Alberta (Canada) were big 1-2 years ago, but once crude oii's prices went down, refining the oil from the sands slowed down.

__________________

"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!

Lenin was exported by Wilhelm. And I wouldn't put too money on the British if Germany was able to freely conduct its naval warfare. And there would be a lot of uncertainty if we didn't send supply to Britain, and our merchants were able to trade with Germany.

Germany winning isn going to change Lenin getting deported how? Also, Germany wasn't free to conduct it's naval war because the high seas fleet got chewed up at Jutland. When they did try in 1918, the sailors revolted which spread to the general public and lead to the collapse of the government.

Quote:

So many "if".... But the biggest if is that even if Britain won, the treaty would've not been drafted in a way that it guaranteed WWII and the rise of Hitler.

A single continental power in Europe by itself guarantees a WWII. Britain is not going to let that situation stand. It also does not in any way change the situation in the east. Japan is still going to be invading China and threatening European colonies.

Sure. This attitude definitely helped us during the Cold War and World War II.

Lets ignore the rest of the world. Lets just focus on ourselves, and be isolationists. I'm sure we'll be ok (sarcasm).

How the hell does what you said relate to what he posted?

HEY GUYS LOOK A HINT: Globalization is not about "HURR WE'RE SO GOOD WE'RE GONNA SAVE THE WORLD", globalization is about cheap labor and a wider market.

also lol cold war. As if you didn't "help" most third-world countries (including mine) enough during that time, everything to keep the "Red Scare" from spreading. Fuck that attitude--thanks to that, the future of countless children in my country has been utterly ruined.

__________________

Place them in a box until a quieter time | Lights down, you up and die.

Good news for Australians: A**hole Atkinson quits as Attorney Generalhttp://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/i...-1225843341005
This is the self-righteous prick who did the following:
1) blocked the establishment of an R18+ rating for video games, preventing adults from choosing for themselves what entertainment to enjoy
2) attempted to censor speech on the Internet (particularly those critical to himself and his party)

As long as his AG seat is not filled by an equal or worse douchebag, freedom has finally arrived in Australia.

SAN FRANCISCO – Google Inc. stopped censoring the Internet for China by shifting its search engine off the mainland Monday but said it will maintain other operations in the country. The maneuver attempts to balance Google's disdain for China's Internet rules with the company's desire to profit from an explosively growing market.

I honestly found myself thinking badly of Google when reading this article.

If Google had pulled out of China completely, while raising an eyebrow over its idea of future growth areas, I would have applauded its stance on ethical behaviors.

If Google had retracted its original statement, while raising an eyebrow over its lack of a... backbone, I would have applauded its stance on business and branding.

This shift to Hong Kong from Beijing gives the appearance that Google is, well, just mouthing the words and not making a firm commitment in either direction, IMHO.

__________________

"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!

HEY GUYS LOOK A HINT: Globalization is not about "HURR WE'RE SO GOOD WE'RE GONNA SAVE THE WORLD", globalization is about cheap labor and a wider market.

also lol cold war. As if you didn't "help" most third-world countries (including mine) enough during that time, everything to keep the "Red Scare" from spreading. Fuck that attitude--thanks to that, the future of countless children in my country has been utterly ruined.

Originally he said that the world, specifically the US would be much better had globalization never occurred. He thinks that we would be far better off without being a superpower.

I did however misinterpret some of his comments and a made an off base comment. That was my bad.

What I thought he was saying was that WE the world would be better off if the US decided to be isolationist and that THIS would be the better alternative for the world as a whole.

I'm not going to sit here and debate about the affects that many US policies have had on your country and others. I already know they were in fact unjust, and uncalled for. There is nothing to argue about here. But this is the result of the US's badly played strategies in the Cold War. But, honestly, if you think the US would have been far better not doing anything in the Cold War, then there is nothing more to say, and this is also not the place to discuss such matters.

was probably better off under the original inhabitants, the Native American tribes, who had a much more sustainable economic model than modern western civilization.

I just read this, and have to point out that the Native American's "economic model" was a total lack of technology, not any desire to be "sustainable." For them, they simply had no way of consuming anywhere as much as the land produced.

@LynnieS
The alternative for Google would have been to lock themselves out of a growing market (after the Chinese have already copied their technology), putting in danger their company's continued growth and overall dominance. You may think self-sacrifice for a political statement or ethics is a noble thing, but not only is it impractical, it is also ineffective - ie, just as unethical.

@LynnieS
The alternative for Google would have been to lock themselves out of a growing market (after the Chinese have already copied their technology), putting in danger their company's continued growth and overall dominance. You may think self-sacrifice for a political statement or ethics is a noble thing, but not only is it impractical, it is also ineffective - ie, just as unethical.

I could have admired Google if it had actually made a choice in either (1) getting completely out of China or (2) going back on its claims and staying in the country. Moving everything but the sales offices out of Beijing and into Hong Kong is... wishy-washy. It simply gives the appearance of taking a stance, but there is no substance behind the decision.

What's worse, there is also the possibility that the central government in Beijing will not look kindly on Google's... essentially trying to have its cake and eating it too. The article made a similar point at the end. Hong Kong is a part of China; it was made into a SAR so it's more free to do things, IMHO, but in the end, if Beijing wants and is willing to deal with the consequences, it can certainly enforce its will there.

__________________

"If ignorance is bliss, then why aren't more people happy?" -- Misc.

Currently listening: Nadda
Currently reading: Procrastination for the win!
Currently playing: "Quest of D", "Border Break" and "Gundam Senjou no Kizuna".
Waiting for: "Shining Force Cross"!

I could have admired Google if it had actually made a choice in either (1) getting completely out of China or (2) going back on its claims and staying in the country. Moving everything but the sales offices out of Beijing and into Hong Kong is... wishy-washy. It simply gives the appearance of taking a stance, but there is no substance behind the decision.

What's worse, there is also the possibility that the central government in Beijing will not look kindly on Google's... essentially trying to have its cake and eating it too. The article made a similar point at the end. Hong Kong is a part of China; it was made into a SAR so it's more free to do things, IMHO, but in the end, if Beijing wants and is willing to deal with the consequences, it can certainly enforce its will there.

1) Leaving China: If Beijing clamps down, it will kick out Google anyway.
2) Going back on its claims and staying in the country: Meekly apologizing and helping to stifle free speech is worthy of admiration to you?
3) Trying to have its cake and eating it too: If Google is allowed to stay without filtering, they win. If Beijing kicks them out, Google can leave with dignity from a not-so-successful business venture.

I could have admired Google if it had actually made a choice in either (1) getting completely out of China or (2) going back on its claims and staying in the country. Moving everything but the sales offices out of Beijing and into Hong Kong is... wishy-washy. It simply gives the appearance of taking a stance, but there is no substance behind the decision.

What's worse, there is also the possibility that the central government in Beijing will not look kindly on Google's... essentially trying to have its cake and eating it too. The article made a similar point at the end. Hong Kong is a part of China; it was made into a SAR so it's more free to do things, IMHO, but in the end, if Beijing wants and is willing to deal with the consequences, it can certainly enforce its will there.

They have liabilities. Certain companies there host their online services through google.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Germany still would have lost. The war wasn't decided on the battlefield, it was decided when the Kaiser was overthrown. German reinforcements from the eastern front pushing back the western allies would not have changed this. If anything, the longer logistics trail needed to supply German troops after a successful offensive would only hasten the revolt due to stripping more resources from the population. Even if by some miracle Germany manages to win, the rest of your chain makes no sense at all. We still get the Weimar Republic, we still get Nazis, we still get Hitler, we still get Lenin, we still get Stalin, and on top of it, we might get a fascist France.

I think you're making a big assumption regarding the other throw of the Kaiser being inevitable. I'll point out that the overthrow was done under the circumstances of the Germans suddenlly finding their enemies having a fantastically large new supply of troop reserves in the Americans. The coup took place under the circumstance of it being blatantly clear that Germany was now going to lose militarily.

It wasn't just Germany that was having morale and logistical issues. Some of Frances most productive farmland was now in the control of the Germans. And elements of the French frank and file were on the verge of mutiny. A scenario without an American intervention could see the French war effort collapsing instead of the Germans. This might not result in outright victory for the Germans, but the war ending a truce with conditions favorable to the Germans is a very real possibility.

I will contest iLney's assertion that this kind of ending for WW1 would prevent a WW2. You'd still have everyone in Europe eager to fight each other just with the instability getting and anger getting shifted around a little. You'd likely still have a WW2, just with different actors under different circumstances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

3) Trying to have its cake and eating it too: If Google is allowed to stay without filtering, they win. If Beijing kicks them out, Google can leave with dignity from a not-so-successful business venture.

This. It may be a better idea for Google PR wise at least to force the Chinese into action rather than initiate it themselves.

It's not like forcing the Chinese to kick them out hurts them anymore than just leaving themselves.

I think you're making a big assumption regarding the other throw of the Kaiser being inevitable. I'll point out that the overthrow was done under the circumstances of the Germans suddenlly finding their enemies having a fantastically large new supply of troop reserves in the Americans. The coup took place under the circumstance of it being blatantly clear that Germany was now going to lose militarily.

It wasn't just Germany that was having morale and logistical issues. Some of Frances most productive farmland was now in the control of the Germans. And elements of the French frank and file were on the verge of mutiny. A scenario without an American intervention could see the French war effort collapsing instead of the Germans. This might not result in outright victory for the Germans, but the war ending a truce with conditions favorable to the Germans is a very real possibility.

I will contest iLney's assertion that this kind of ending for WW1 would prevent a WW2. You'd still have everyone in Europe eager to fight each other just with the instability getting and anger getting shifted around a little. You'd likely still have a WW2, just with different actors under different circumstances.

This. It may be a better idea for Google PR wise at least to force the Chinese into action rather than initiate it themselves.

It's not like forcing the Chinese to kick them out hurts them anymore than just leaving themselves.

More so, Wilson played a key role in the dismembering of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, leaving only Germany as potential Central European power, tearing apart century old multinational communities, and allowing for the rise of conflicting nationalism between and within the newly formed states.

The worst part of this story are the people who think the lesbian couple ruined prom for the rest of them, and the a**es who agree and blame the girl for not "standing aside" for the majority (see Yahoo news discussions). The school's reaction of canceling the entire prom is far disproportionate to the small request of two girls to attend together, and a clear case of retaliation.